【Native Speaker每日综合训练—45系列】【45-01】文史哲 Interstellar

cyndichiang

内容：cyndichiang 编辑： cyndichiang

Stay tuned for our latest post! Follow us here ---> http://weibo.com/u/3476904471

Part I: Speaker

Martin Villeneuve: How I made an impossible film

Source: TED
http://www.ted.com/talks/martin_villeneuve_how_i_made_an_impossible_film/transcript?language=en#t-578180

[Rephrase 1, 10:55]

cyndichiang

Part II: Speed

‘Interstellar’ movie review: There’s a lot, but does it add up to anything?
By Ann Hornaday  | November 4 2014

[Time 2]
Say this much for “Interstellar”: It takes muchness to a new level.

Ask a handful of viewers what they think of Christopher Nolan’s science-fiction adventure story — starring a perfectly cast Matthew McConaughey as a space cowboy blessed with equal parts swagger and shamanistic depth — and they will rightfully wonder which movie you’re referring to: The outer-space epic that tries mightily to give such precursors as “2001: A Space Odyssey” and “Gravity” a run for their O-rings in sheer scale and ambition? The provocative, sometimes ponderous, meditation on environmental ruin, intellectual freedom and the demise of manifest destiny? The mawkish daddy-needs-to-save-the-world-now melodrama? The pulverizing, near-constant sonic boom of the sound design modulated by periods of haunting, airless silence?

“Interstellar” is all these things — and more, when you throw in a couple of goofy exercises in stunt casting. Nolan, who brought such grandiosity and sanctimonious self-seriousness to the “Batman” franchise and whose densely layered metaphysical puzzle “Inception” is surely still being debated in living rooms throughout the world, once again has made a movie that wants to be taken more seriously than mere spectacle or sensory mind-body trip. He’s out to overwhelm, crush and otherwise immobilize an audience already saturated with 3-D extravaganzas and narcotized by computer-generated hoo-hah.

True to his artistic convictions, Nolan has filmed “Interstellar” on IMAX film stock, proudly planting the flag once more for a format that, like the Earth at the center of the story, is careening toward extinction. It’s a praiseworthy mission and there are moments of genuine awe and majesty in “Interstellar,” but there are just as many passages that play as if Nolan is less interested in value for the viewers than proving a point, whether about the arcana of quantum physics, his technical prowess or the enduring power of love.

Which isn’t to say there’s not much to value in a film that begins in the wide open spaces of a ¬modern-day Dust Bowl and ventures to galaxies far, far away. In an Andrew Wyeth-inspired farmhouse in the middle of a vast cornfield, a former test pilot named Cooper (McConaughey) lives in the not-too-distant future with his two kids and father-in-law (John Lithgow), the world outside rapidly shriveling into agricultural collapse. With food so scarce, all social and economic resources have turned from technological innovation and space exploration in favor of farming.
[389 words]

[Time 3]
“We used to look up at the sky and wonder about our place in the stars,” Coop says mournfully over his beer bottle. “Now, we just look down and wonder about our place in the dirt.”

That changes when Coop and his beloved daughter Murphy (Mackenzie Foy) discover a mysterious code that leads to equally mysterious coordinates out in the countryside. Soon enough, Coop has been enlisted on a top-secret, probably deadly mission to find a habitable planet outside the solar system, and he’s cramming into a craft alongside three other astronauts willing to risk their lives to save humanity.

One of those scientists is played by Anne Hathaway, whose molten-brown eyes seem always on the verge of tears as the crew rattles its way through black holes and worm holes and star stuff (oh my!). Nolan stages their journey with impressive, even thrilling verisimilitude, juxtaposing the deafening rattle and thrum inside the rocket with the eerily quiet world just outside. And he brings just as much imaginative vision to the places they eventually discover, from the enormous, terrifying wave that threatens to engulf them on one watery planet to the tundra-like expanse of another.

Oddly enough, when the end of the world is near, only the developed West will see fit to respond: “Interstellar” is a remarkably monocultural affair, up to and including the British accents of co-stars David Gyasi and Michael Caine, who intones Dylan Thomas with wearying obviousness throughout the production.
With his Chuck Yeager-worthy drawl and reflectiveness well honed from his Lincoln commercials, McConaughey makes for a compelling, even believable hero who is saddled with guilt over leaving his kids at home, perhaps never to return. (He breaks own with particularly convincing abandon when he receives a pivotal video missive from home.) But too often, the father-daughter dynamics that propel “Interstellar” — which Nolan co-wrote with his brother, Jonathan — feel shrewdly calculated, the emotionalism ginned up to a hysterically maudlin pitch.
[324words]

[Time 4]
Once Cooper and his colleagues cross back and forth between the space-time continuum, “Interstellar” falls into the talky trap, with the filmmaker trying to overcome plodding, drearily explanatory passages with Hans Zimmer’s basso profundo organ-music score and pummeling sound effects. (One of “Interstellar’s” producers is the theoretical physicist Kip Thorne, whose research undergirds many of the film’s most fascinating ideas about time and gravity.)

With the exception of a sympathetic computer named TARS — wittily voiced by Bill Irwin — there’s precious little humor in “Interstellar,” unless you count a surprise cameo that conjures visions of the Hollywood satire “The Player” in its absurd bid for an entirely different brand of star stuff.

By the time Cooper realizes his rightful place in the grand cosmic soup — with the help of a scientist back home played by Jessica Chastain — the endgame becomes a protracted demand for tears that, for many viewers, will feel like distant Earth-bound artifacts themselves. “Interstellar” tries so hard to be so many things that it winds up shrinking into itself, much like one of the collapsed stars Coop hurtles past on his way to new worlds. For a movie about transcending all manner of dimensions, “Interstellar” ultimately falls surprisingly flat.
[201 words]

Source: Washington post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/goingoutguide/movies/interstellar-movie-review-theres-a-lot-but-does-it-add-up-to-anything/2014/11/04/cf798f32-6455-11e4-bb14-4cfea1e742d5_story.html

The Anti-HAL: TheInterstellar Robot Should Be the Future of Artificial Intelligence
By Miles Brundage｜NOV. 14 2014

[Time 5]
The plot of sci-fi blockbuster Interstellar focuses primarily on space exploration, black holes, and time travel, so it isn’t surprising that a lot has already been writtenon the movie’s portrayal of science—there’s even a book out already on the topic. What’s been discussed less is Interstellar’s portrayal of artificial intelligence and robotics, probably because the movie’s robots work so well that they never run amok and steal the show. Beyond bucking sci-fi stereotypes, though, Interstellar’s portrayal of AI illuminates several features of what our future with robots should (and shouldn’t) look like. (Warning: There are spoilers galore in the rest of this post.)

TARS, the main robot featured in Interstellar, looks nothing like a human. It also looks nothing like most robots in existence today. Sci-fi movies typically imagine robots that, like the iconic C-3PO, look roughly human-like (e.g. having two legs, two arms, and a face-ish thing up top, even if it is clearly not a human face).TARS, in contrast, doesn’t really have legs or arms or any other recognizable telltales of a biological organism. It reflects a different approach to the development of robots, more common among real-life roboticists than those apparently working in most science fiction universes, that puts function above humanness in the design of technology. True, some humanoid robots are currently in development, but favoring function over a familiar face may actually be in the interest of humanity. TARS’s last-minute rescue of Dr. Brand would have been impossible with a humanoid design, for example.

At the same time, TARS is no toaster. It speaks in fluent (if sometimes awkward) English and makes valuable contributions to the mission on a regular basis. In this regard, TARS is a model for a system that is user-friendly (combining fluid natural dialogue with common sense) while not seeking to re-create the physical and cognitive limitations of humans. It is commonplace these days for commentators (particularly those in the tech sector) to argue that technology complements rather than replaces human skills, but TARS shows how this is a false dichotomy. In order for it to do an adequate job of assisting humans, TARS needs certain humanlike functionalities, such as the ability to speak and understand language, but it needn’t be precisely made in man’s own image, either. An army of TARSes, even if not designed to replace or imitate humans, would have enormous practical applications.
[396 words]

[Time 6]
The rights and needs of robots are another common theme in science fiction, and the source of a lot of plot conflicts. Consider, for example, science fiction futures that portray robots as looking and feeling just like humans someday, like in the movies A.I. and Bicentennial Man.

Interstellar makes no such assumptions. Rather, TARS is portrayed as a complex tool that performs a role similar to another crewmate on the ship but has none of the rights afforded to humans. Indeed, TARS once explicitly states that it is required to follow orders from humans, and that consequently its heroic sacrifices aren’t as heroic as they seem. Time and time again, TARS saves humans without any regard for its own self-interest except insofar as its survival is important to humans’ survival. This mirrors the recommendations of many of those interested in the ethics of AI and robotics. Cognitive scientist Joanna Bryson, for example, arguesthat imbuing robots the ability to suffer as a result of how they are used is a choice, and one that we have good reasons not to make. Between now and the time when building something remotely similar to TARS will be possible, we will probably learn a lot more about the nature of conscious experience in humans and other animals, and the possibility of replicating it in machines. For now, there are some early signs from research on consciousness to suggest that digital computers may never be able to experience conscious thought, and consequently TARS’s treatment as a mechanical slave is justified.

A final characteristic that makes TARS a valuable role model for robots in the real world is its relative transparency compared to existing technologies. That is to say, it is not only able to explain its decisions in terms that humans can understand, but it also is able to accept inputs from humans that alter its decision-making at the most basic level—for example, its “honesty parameter,” which seems to range from zero to 100 percent. By being transparent, TARS not only is more useful and customizable, but it also avoids many of the risks associated with AI in typical science fiction plots.
[358 words]

Source: slate
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/11/14/tars_the_interstellar_robot_should_be_the_future_of_artificial_intelligence.html

cyndichiang

Part III: Obstacle

From ‘Alien’ to ‘Interstellar,’ what happens to women alone in space
Alyssa Rosenberg ｜November 10

[Paraphrase 7]

When “Alien” arrived in theaters in 1979, Ridley Scott’s science fiction horror classic was announced with the tagline, “In space no one can hear you scream.” The promise of that slogan, of course, is that the movie’s main character, Warrant Officer Ellen Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) will scream, and scream she does, while fending off two dreadful attacks from the menacing creature of the title. Advances in space travel may have created new careers for women like Ripley, but they have also created new opportunities for her to be put in danger in ways that are particular to her gender.

In “Alien,” the creature is a metaphor for sexual assault: it attacks by attaching itself to its victims and turning them into hosts for alien offspring, which burst forth from humans’ chests, the ugliness of forced penetration reversed and made horribly visible. The sequel, “Aliens,” pits Ripley against an alien queen, the human woman defending her adoptive daughter Newt (Carrie Henn) while the queen plans to raise an army of her own in children. “Alien 3″ finds Ripley marooned on a prison planet where men convicted of exceptionally violent crimes and sexual offenses are incarcerated. “Alien: Resurrection” finds Ripley reduced to her reproductive capacity, cloned for the alien queen that is growing within her.

The idea that our gender politics are always with us, centuries into the future and light-years beyond the planet where they first developed, is a dispiriting one. But what if we could escape not just Earth’s gravity, but the constraints placed on us by virtue of the bodies we were born into? If women were left alone by themselves in the openness of space, who would we be? This is an idea that periodically flickers around the edges of science fiction films, most recently Christopher Nolan’s space opera “Interstellar,” a possibility postulated but never quite confirmed, like the contents of a black hole.

If we consider these questions, Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan’s “Contact” is an obvious predecessor to “Interstellar.” Sagan and Druyan began work on the story in 1979, the same year “Alien” arrived in theaters. “Contact” shares a producer, Lynda Obst, with “Interstellar,” as well as a star, Matthew McConaughey. He plays a theologian in “Contact,” and spaceship pilot Cooper in “Interstellar.” But the most important connective tissue between them is their female scientists.

Unlike many other movies about space, which gloss over the bureaucratic challenges that lie on the way to the launch pad, “Contact”  is substantially concerned with how hard it is for Ellie Arroway (Jodie Foster), whose work is on the search for extraterrestrial life, to get off the ground. She must decode a set of blueprints sent to Earth by another species, fight for the opportunity to be the passenger in the craft she helped to build (she is rejected because of her lack of religious faith), and when that craft is destroyed by terrorism, travel to Japan to travel in a second ship, built in secret.

This struggle is worth it–briefly. Aboard the craft, Ellie gets confirmation of many of her scientific theories, and to see parts of the universe with her own eyes that she had previously only glimpsed through the Very Large Array. And most powerfully, she experiences direct contact with the beings who sent the plans to earth, mediated through a vision of her deceased and much-beloved father who encouraged her to explore the world. The confluence of two impossible things at once helps to expand Ellie’s sense of the universe spiritually as well as scientifically.

The results are bittersweet, though. Back on Earth, Ellie faces the same constraints that bound her previously, and worse. Her heartfelt testimony to Congress actually renders her less credible than she might have been before her trip. Rather than being a scientist with a marginal focus, she is now an emotional woman, asking lawmakers to believe her just because she wants them to. Ellie’s brief transcendence makes Earth’s gravity weigh even heavier on her return.
“Gravity,” which won  Alfonso Cuarón an Academy Award for Best Director earlier this year, is a much narrower movie than either “Contact” or “Interstellar.” It is very near-future science fiction, concerned with the consequences of a routine mission gone awry rather than possible contact with other intelligent life, much less the survival of the human species.

But Dr. Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock) has more in common with Cooper, the pilot McConaughey plays in “Interstellar” than fans of the latter will likely acknowledge. Both movies (and both main characters) are intensely sentimental, even if the sources of their operatic feelings are different. Ryan has gone into space in part to escape the pain of losing her daughter. Cooper chases his lost dreams of being a pilot into the unknown, leaving his living children behind and trying to convince himself that he will return in time to still play a meaningful role in their lives.

When an accident destroys the shuttle where Ryan and her colleague Matt (George Clooney) were working, Ryan must struggle to survive, and to confront the suicidal impulse that has stalked her since her daughter’s death. And when Matt sacrifices himself to save her, Ryan is left truly alone to reckon with the true extent of her competence and her physical and emotional resources. The grandeur of space is the setting for Ryan’s intensely personal inventory. Unlike Ellie, Ryan returns to Earth almost literally reborn.

“Interstellar” differs from “Contact” and “Gravity” in that its ostensible main character, Cooper, is a man, and for much of his voyage to another galaxy, he is part of a crew. But an important subplot in the movie is the evolution of Dr. Brand (Anne Hathaway), one of Cooper’s colleagues on their quest to find another planet suitable for human habitation.

Unlike Cooper, who had to detach from his children, Brand is leaving behind her father (Michael Caine) because of their mutual belief in the importance of the mission. She is also drawn through the wormhole by her love for Dr. Wolf Edmonds, one of the scientists who went to scout the potential worlds, and who stopped transmitting data several years ago.

Like Ellie Arroway, Brand’s emotions prove a disadvantage. Cooper uses her love for Edmonds to paint her as biased when the crew must decide which planet to investigate after a disaster saps their fuel resources. The scene in which she defends relying on that affection as a kind of scientific force is painful, and among the worst-written in the movie. But Brand’s instincts about which planet turn out to be correct, no matter Brand’s reasoning behind them. Towards the end of “Interstellar,” Cooper takes a terrible risk to get her to Edmonds’ planet on her own, where she can try to find the man she loves and set up a colony of fertilized embryos.

“Interstellar” ends with Brand alone on Edmonds’ planet, mourning his death and preparing to set up the colony on her own, while Cooper steals a starship and returns to find her.

Maybe we are supposed to imagine that Cooper and Brand will commence a love affair, or that they will raise a generation of human children who have never known Earth. Maybe we are supposed to feel good that Cooper’s long-abandoned daughter Murph (played alternately by Mackenzie Foy, Jessica Chastain, and Ellen Burstyn) has forgiven him for his initial abandonment and sent him back into space.

Instead, I was left wondering who Brand will become on her own in the emptiness of space, on a planet that is all her own to shape and be shaped by. No one can hear you scream in space. But as frightening as a void can be, it can also mean an absence of the things that might have made you scream in frustration, in terror, or in grief on Earth.
[1305 words]

Source: washingtonpost
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act-four/wp/2014/11/10/from-alien-to-interstellar-what-happens-to-women-alone-in-space/

铁板神猴

太劲爆了 这楼我要了！谢谢cyndi~~~！！！大爱！
------------

Speaker

impossible to make, small budget, time,

Robert, busy, camera all angles, post production

musical instruments, can’t afford, someone else to pay, triangular

green, screen impossible men to work with, offer to dream with

crazy things worth doing, when people tell you it’s impossible, it might be an even better reason to do it.

AWESOME!!!

Speed

2’05’'
1’49’'
1’00’'
1’53’'
1’49’'

Obstacle

alien first came out as a sign involving women and sex, but the new “interstellar” tells about a possibility of breaking the constraints. (women alone in space)

Contact is an predecessor to “Interstellar”. female scientist

unlike other films, CONTACT focuses on how hard for XXX to get off ground. worthy at the end. but still questioned when returning to earth.

GRAVITY is narrower.

Both sentimental. Ryan got reborn after struggling outer space.

Interstellar difference: main character is a man. but another importance is the change of DR brand, a female crew.

Brand’s emotion of love turns out to be disadvantage.

the ending remains unknown, yet the author wonders what will Brand turns into when she is alone in the space.

apooolo

2# 389 3‘27 111wpm
interstellar does't seem to get high praise. describe the story.
3# 324 2'51 110wpm
the coming and going of the story. nolan edited the story in some part.
4# 201 1'30 134wpm
one of the editiors is theoretical physics scientist. the story and conception is great. details of the story.
5# 389 3'09 125wpm
the robort design reaches a new level in the film, not human-like design, but accomplish several functions, some of the functions even can not be achieved if the robort is designed in human-like. the TRAS gave some perspective about future robort research.
6# 358 2'49 123wpm
the feeling and consciousness of robort before the film is one idea, but the film gave another design, which is that the robort is complex tool for human. it doesn't have own needing, it takes order from human, its purpose is to keep huamn alive and save human. what's more, its transparency is another differencw with existing technologies.
obstacle 1305 11'10 116wpm
the story of the female role in several typicla films in history and nowdays. alien, contact, gravity and interstellar.

十指芊芊93622

listening: how this person made a impossible movie, which is a dream of him for over 20 years

1. the content of the hit movie
2. more detials about this movie ,three scientsts want to save our earth ,and they have been through
a lot of troubles,such as black hole ,worm hole and so on. There is family bond in it too,but it seems
to be somehow calculated
3. there is something wrong with the music when two characters walking through the time.
4.the human-like robots in this movie
5.TARS is quite useful

1        A        0:03:31        N
2        A        0:03:07        N
3        A        0:02:20        N
4        A        0:03:58        N
5        A        0:03:59        N
6        A        0:12:19        N

Jiayouqin

Thanks for sharing!
T2: 3’25’’
T3: 2’10’’
T4: 1’15’’
Main idea: Interstellar is trying to be all, but ends up becoming flat.
Attitude: negative
Structure:
•        Int is a combination of many past movies and more. Nolan seems less interested in value for the viewer than what he cares.
•        A brief introduction of the content of the movie. (没看懂。。)
•        Problems with the movie. (又没看懂。。捂脸)

T5: 2’42’’
T6: 2’19’’
Main idea: what are some characters that make TARS a model for future generation robots?
Attitude: positive
Structure:
•        TARS illuminates features of what our future with robots should look like
•        Looks nothing like a human. Function over appearance.
•        Highly skilled and capable of completing missions. Practical applications
•        Do not assume robots have rights and needs
•        Transparency compared to existing technology. Customizable and low risk.
Obstacle: 9’06’’

Stefan00

Time 2:3’08 comment on the new file: interstellar.
time 3:2’59 monoculture/ emotion card
time 4:2’12 after analyzing a lot of factors of the movie, the author think “interstellar” flat.
time 5: 2’56’’ what should the robots like in the future. It has been shown in the blockbuster “interstellar”
time 6:2’30’’ Needs and rights a robot should own.
obstacle: 9’32 the article compares several similar sic-fi movies and discussed about the theme, gender, solitude, etc of them.

Phoebedyf2

time2: 3'39''
The movie Interstellar is of high comment, whereas the diractor may stress more on explaning the high technique and the power of love than valuing the viewers.

time3: 2'09''

time4: 1'25''

time5: 2'41''
TARS, the robot in the Interstellar, looks nothing like human, but has nore functions and also can speak as well as understand English.

time6：2'20''
TARS is just like a real mate in the ship, whereas it has no rights. Besides, TARS is very reliable because it is transparent.

obstacle: 11'18''
In Alien, there is a sexual assault.
In Contact, a woman tried very hard to help complete the mission on the ground.
In Interstellar, the main women character is very tough and stick to her love. The author is curious about what will happen if she build a whole new world alone.

L阿贼

2、2:46  the movie about “Interstellar”  is not as good as people think and there are some doutness in this movie
3、2:11  the content of the story
4、1:01 the thing which happen in the interstellar
5、2:18 talking about the roboat TARS which do not look like the human, and the feature and behaviors in this movie. TARS stands for the future artificial intelligence.
6、2:56 talking about the TARS' mission in this movie which is  commanded by people and TARS does not have the feeling.